Sarge mode

[MickZagger]

After dropping five of their last eight games, in which two of three victories came against the two worst teams in the NBA, the Blazers on Monday "got after it" during what players called a "strenuous" and "intense" practice. A range of issues were addressed -- including late-game execution, offensive spacing and movement and fast breaks -- and McMillan was in "Sarge" mode throughout the two-hour workout, barking at his team in a demonstrative manner that rarely has surfaced in recent seasons.

Afterward, that demeanor continued during an interview session as McMillan addressed his lineup, the Blazers' poor play and the cure for their ailments. When first asked whether he would make any changes to his lineup, McMillan replied, 'We change every time I substitute." Eventually he acknowledged there would be no changes.

McMillan was willing to discuss those types of issues, but he became prickly when talking about his starting lineup and distribution of minutes. He was particularly defensive when the subject of Nicolas Batum's playing time surfaced.

"There we go," McMillan said, when asked if Batum should play more. "You guys want me to change the point guard. You want to try and get (Batum) minutes."

http://www.oregonlive.com/blazers/index.ssf/2012/02/trail_blazers_problems_begin_to_boil_over.html

 

[ehizzy3]

lol nates act is done. he is gone by june.

 

[PapaG]

First full practice in how long?

Hopefully they remember how they played after training camp.

The funniest part of the "Fire Nate!" crowd is that a new coach isn't going to have time to even practice with the team, so other than making the team play streetball, what's the point?

 

[Natebishop3]

First full practice in how long?

Hopefully they remember how they played after training camp.

The funniest part of the "Fire Nate!" crowd is that a new coach isn't going to have time to even practice with the team, so other than making the team play streetball, what's the point?

You act as though the season is worth saving...

1. Fire nate.

2. Start the young guys.

3. Improve draft position.

4. Use cap space to pair some real talent with Aldridge.

5. Hire Bert to coach the team.

 

[PapaG]

You act as though the season is worth saving...

1. Fire nate.

2. Start the young guys.

3. Improve draft position.

4. Use cap space to pair some real talent with Aldridge.

5. Hire Bert to coach the team.

All but (5) sound exactly like the 2004 season, except that LMA should be replaced with Zach.

Looking at the stats, this season is definitely worth saving. Pace is the highest of Nate's era, the OFF EFF is still solid, the DEF EFF is way better than any we've seen from a Nate team, and some players are playing like crap.

I think a lot of you are going to disappointed when the Blazers go on a big run over the next month, and end up making a run in the playoffs.

 

[MARIS61]

If you have 3 superstars and aren't winning, it's a coaching problem.

If all you have is 1 borderline allstar and a decent supporting cast and your record is 15-13, your coach is overachieving.

 

[THE HCP]

^Bam, well typed!

 

[Nikolokolus]

First full practice in how long?

Hopefully they remember how they played after training camp.

The funniest part of the "Fire Nate!" crowd is that a new coach isn't going to have time to even practice with the team, so other than making the team play streetball, what's the point?

Better draft position and a chance to see if Nolan Smith, Eliot Wiliams and (HA!) Luke Babbitt or (Double HA!) Armon Johnson have anything to offer moving forward

 

[THE HCP]

I can tell you the last 2 won;t amount to shit son!

 

[MARIS61]

You act as though the season is worth saving...

1. Fire nate.
and hire a worse coach?
2. Start the young guys.
even though they really, really suck.
3. Improve draft position.
by throwing games?
4. Use cap space to pair some real talent with Aldridge.
PA wouldn't know talent if he tripped over it.
5. Hire Bert to coach the team.
has it come to Muppetts now?

Start at the root of the problem. We need a new owner.

 

[Natebishop3]

If you have 3 superstars and aren't winning, it's a coaching problem.

If all you have is 1 borderline allstar and a decent supporting cast and your record is 15-13, your coach is overachieving.

Borderline all-star? LOL

If Nate is so good, how come he couldn't get anything out of Sergio or Rudy?

 

[BLAZER PROPHET]

If you have 3 superstars and aren't winning, it's a coaching problem.

If all you have is 1 borderline allstar and a decent supporting cast and your record is 15-13, your coach is overachieving.

Good point.

 

[BLAZER PROPHET]

Borderline all-star? LOL

If Nate is so good, how come he couldn't get anything out of Sergio or Rudy?

Nobody else could either. So what's the point?

 

[PapaG]

If Nate is so good, how come he couldn't get anything out of Sergio or Rudy?

Sergio is out of the NBA. Rudy has a .098 WS/48 with Denver and a 13 PER.

What were you saying again? Perhaps you should bring up Martell Webster or Sebastian Telfair.

 

[RoyToy]

Making the millionaires earn their paychecks

How dare him...

 

[RR7]

pretty sure he's mocking maris for being a huge supporter of those 2, and bashing nate for not playing them.

 

[PapaG]

pretty sure he's mocking maris for being a huge supporter of those 2, and bashing nate for not playing them.

Nate played those two stiffs, and got more out of them, than any other stop they had/have had in the NBA.

Rudy's shooting 32% from 3 this year. I'm sure that's George Karl's fault for not putting him in a situation to succeed?

 

[RoyToy]

He's obviously playing mind games with Rudy, thus resulting in Rudy's confidence being shaken and playing too tight

 

[Mediocre Man]

If you have a coach that has a .333 winning % in the playoffs with your team, it's a coaching problem

^Bam, well typed!

 

[PapaG]

If you have a coach that has a .333 winning % in the playoffs with your team, it's a coaching problem

^Bam, well typed!

If you have a coach that hasn't made the NBA playoffs in 3 years (Adelman in Houston the past two and it looks like Minnesota this year), it's a coaching problem.

BAM!

 

[Mediocre Man]

If you have a coach that hasn't made the NBA playoffs in 3 years (Adelman in Houston the past two and it looks like Minnesota this year), it's a coaching problem.

BAM!

Agreed 100%. Here are some links to remind you what should happen to coaches not getting the job done

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2011/basketball/nba/04/18/rick.adelman/index.html

http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/news/story?id=6384752

http://www.blazersedge.com/2011/4/18/2118939/rick-adelman-fired-by-the-houston-rockets

 

[THE HCP]

If you have a coach that has a .333 winning % in the playoffs with your team, it's a coaching problem

^Bam, well typed!

If you have a coach who has had more players games missed do to injury in the history of the league yet gets the most out of what he's got, he should be considered a competent coach..... BAM!

 

[MickZagger]

If you have a coach who has had more players games missed do to injury in the history of the league yet gets the most out of what he's got, he should be considered a competent coach..... BAM!

He should be a motivational speaker.

 

[Boob-No-More]

When your team in 1-9 in close games your coach should be fired before they have a chance to go to 1-19.

The LAST and ONLY time the Blazers have won a close game this season was OPENING NIGHT against the 76ers. Since then they have gone 0-9 in close games. And it's not like they are just losing close games to good, or even above average teams. They are losing close games to some of the worst teams in the league (Kings, Pistons). Basically, if the game is close, the Blazers will lose. Perhaps it's time for the coach to make an adjustment, or perhaps time to find a coach who will.

BAM, BAM, FUCKING BAM!!!

 

[Boob-No-More]

http://www.oregonlive.com/blazers/index.ssf/2012/02/trail_blazers_problems_begin_to_boil_over.html

"When first asked whether he would make any changes to his lineup, McMillan replied, 'We change every time I substitute." Eventually he acknowledged there would be no changes."

Of course there won't be any changes, Nate LOVES consistency, even if that means losing consistently. They've lost NINE CLOSE GAMES IN A ROW. Why on earth would anyone want to change that?

BNM

 

[oldmangrouch]

Serious question: how is it that 4 key players - Felton, Crawford, Wallace and Matthews are all playing below reasonable expectations? Are we really arguing whether a coach has any responsibility when 4 previously useful to very good players are all playing like crap?

 

[Boob-No-More]

Serious question: how is it that 4 key players - Felton, Crawford, Wallace and Matthews are all playing below reasonable expectations? Are we really arguing whether a coach has any responsibility when 4 previously useful to very good players are all playing like crap?

Which is the cause, and which is the effect? Do they suck because they've all suddenly gotten worse at EXACTLY the same time, or do they suck because they are playing in an unimaginative offense not designed to take advantage of their talents?

BNM

 

[oldmangrouch]

Which is the cause, and which is the effect? Do they suck because they've all suddenly gotten worse at EXACTLY the same time, or do they suck because they are playing in an unimaginative offense not designed to take advantage of their talents?

BNM

Call me a cynic, but I find the latter explanation more credible.

 

[Boise Blazer]

I think there are a lot of factors involved in how poorly we are playing this year but to ignore that Nate is one of those factors is naive and homer-ish beyond all rational reason.

 

[Natebishop3]

Sergio is out of the NBA. Rudy has a .098 WS/48 with Denver and a 13 PER.

What were you saying again? Perhaps you should bring up Martell Webster or Sebastian Telfair.

Yeah, because obviously I was being serious about Sergio and Rudy.....